[jillybean]

pescetom, on 2026-August-28, 11:03, said:

How would your strong club partnership have fared?
West will keep quiet for once.

We have only had one game so far, we will probably play it twice a month.
Without referring to the system notes, I have no idea how to bid this in a strong club context.

[pescetom]

 DavidKok, on 2026-August-28, 10:39, said:

North should bid 3NT over 2♣-2♦; 3♦.

It depends a lot on 2♣ opening agreements I would think.
For instance our national style is to open some strong single suiters with relatively few HCP, finding a suit hopelessly unstopped is quite likely.
If 3♦ could have a 4 card major there is a case for bidding 3♥ too.

[DavidKok]

I strongly disagree. This is the best example of when not to focus on stoppers, regardless of agreements of 2♣. Bidding 5♦ is awful.

To be clear, I understand how nice it feels to side the contract in the strong hand, and how cooperative it is to show values so that partner can show the rest. Here it's wrong, by a large margin.

[pescetom]

To be clear, if I thought that 3♦ could ever be the hand of South, then I agree that 5♦ is awful.

My point about agreements is that the world is a big and varied place. You feel that 2♣ should invariably be 24+ HCP or whatever and no unbalanced hand should rebid NT. I play in a country where 2♣ can often be half of that but with a single suit and very few losers, and 3m is often agreed to be just that.

[DavidKok]

Don't tell me what I think. I am saying that North should bid 3NT also in a style where 2♣ can be a much weaker hand with long diamonds, or some decent hcp hand with a bunch of trick-taking potential, or a 6♦4M hand. I've said this three times now, please understand that I am not talking about what to do in my style, and not talking about a style where this is a normal 3♦ bid (it's a misbid, plain and simple). I am saying that North received the worst possible news - partner doesn't have a major or a balanced hand but is showing length in our singleton in a 4x1 pattern by making the most space-consuming bid. We should hit the brakes now. Bid 3NT. There is no space for siding, or stoppers. Besides, we aren't expected to have much on this auction anyway. Let partner know that our hand just got even worse, by clarifying degree of fit and (lack of) ability to play in 4M. Sometimes it'll even make, but even if we go off any other route rates to be even worse.

[mikeh]

pescetom, on 2026-August-28, 08:56, said:

MP

---

I had no 2♥ Red Flag with this partner and no discussion of the implications of 3♦ either. I figured it was likely to be single suited and a glimpse at my own diamonds made that look even more likely. We're in a game force, I bid 5♦ fast arrival. Down 3 for 7%.

If I was in South and partner bid 2♥ denying a K, I think I would punt 3NT anyway. So mikeh is probably right about this too, although it might have saved this South's neck by avoiding the 3♦ bid.

Out of 55 tables, 15 were down in 5♦ (or 3NT-1 on a ♥A lead), 10 were in 1♦+n (or 3♦=), 1 in 4♠=, 12 in the evergreen top of 3NT=+.

I find the notion of bidding 5D absurd. I also find your description of your national style disturbing. Let me see if I understand you: 2C could be no more than a decent opening hand in terms of hcp but will have a long, strong suit. Playing that style, nevertheless the sequence 2C 2D 3D is absolute game force such that as responder with 4=4=1=4 and not a trace of a trick in your hand you felt it was a good idea to bid for 11 tricks rather than bid what looks to me like a perfectly normal 3N. Ok, so opener could have a suit wide open. They still have to lead it (and be able to take 5 tricks in it…I’ve seen suits break 4=4 more than once) and for 5D to be better your partner needs 11 winners in his own hand. I like my chances in 3M infinitely more than I do in 5D, which looks very strange to me